About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
will listen to what the president has to say about the argument over susan rice. >> if senator graham and senator mccain want to go after somebody, they should go after me, and i'm happy to have that discussion, but for them to gof a u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi and simply making a prez sentation information she had receive and to besmirch her reputation is outrageo outrageous. >> if the president thinks that we are pick on people, he really does not have any idea of how serious this issue is. >> the benghazi battle turning into a hot issue. i will talk to one of the senators taking the president to task, kelly ayotte. but we will begin with the latest on the petraeus investigation. we are joined by suzanne, welcome back. >> thank you, piers. always nice to be here. >> here is my overview on the key characters. we now know who the fbi agent was who began this whole investigation, fredrick w. hu hmm fri who is a glorous name and he is through friends and colleagues of clearing himself of anything wrong, is that right? >> yes, a couple of sources who have come out
first testified and briefed capitol hill and apparently after ambassador susan rice made those comments. >> that's why it's so significant, it also came after ambassador rice's appearance on the sunday shows, where she is now being grilled by john mccain and others. i'm talking to him in a few minutes. so it's very significant i think what general petraeus believed at the time. it does beg a belief, really, why would ambassador rice go on national television, having had a briefing we believe from the cia, which turned out to be flawed if the director of the cia right away knew this was an al qaeda affiliated group? >> yeah, you know, it's washington, isn't it. i mean, you know, the theory, what petraeus is expected to talk about is he had his talking points. he got them declassified, approved to go out there in public. when ambassador rice started talking from her talking points, this included other information that wasn't exactly what the cia thought might be really going on. i think some members of capitol hill have brought it down to this point, was the obama administration incredibl
by the president. >> and in regards to susan rice, it was clear that she had nothing to do with the benghazi, and her only role was to go to the "meet the press" and repeat what she had been told by the intelligent services, and do you accept that part of the defense? >> piers, i think it begs the question. why would you go on every major sunday show, because you have tof affirmatively put yourself out there if you had nothing to do with it. you know you have a certain responsibility and you have to be able to tell the american people the truth, and i think that there are serious questions about it. we know that there was e-mails sent from the state department within hours to the white house identifying that ansar al sharia had claimed responsibility, a terrorist group, and for the administration to put her out there and also in her role as a u.n. ambassador, why are you putting me out there versus the secretary of state or the cia or even leon panetta. >> does this tell you it is cover-up or conspiracy? are we talking about a major cover-up that we are defeating al qaeda or simply just pret
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)